The need for European citizens to be more involved in scientific research has emerged from the conclusions of the studies commissioned by the EC and by independent bodies. In the first part of this contribution, I will discuss the question of whether a dialogue between society and science is desirable. I will attempt to claim that at least one of the reasons why the dialogue between science and society should be defended has been underestimated in the course of most of (...) the studies carried out: the fact the scientific knowledge helps to a create a better, more rounded, more aware human being which can only benefit society. Subsequently, I will deal with the various genres of scientific literature. While in modern times, communication of scientific discoveries has been reduced to the article, in the nineteenth century scientists made use of more varied literary forms such as journals, letters and narrative essays which were more accessible to those who were not specialists but nevertheless curious about scientific matters. I believe that these more popular forms of writing helped to close the gap between the public and science. (shrink)

In 1975, the English evolutionist William Donald Hamilton held in Brazil a series of lectures entitled “Population genetics and social behaviour”. The unpublished notes of these conferences—written by Hamilton and recently discovered at the British Library—offer an opportunity to reflect on some of the author’s ideas about evolution. The year of the conference is particularly significant, as it took place shortly after the applications of the Price equation with which Hamilton was able to build a model that included several levels (...) of selection. In this paper I mainly analyse the inaugural lecture in which Hamilton proposes a simple model to disprove the hypothesis supported by the British zoologist C. Vero Wynne-Edwards regarding mechanisms to prevent “over-exploitation of the food supply” in “the interests of the survival of the group”. The document presented here is of great historical interest. Not only because manuscript offers a model that—since it was intended for teaching purposes—had never before appeared in the published version, but also because of the general index of the lectures that accompanies it. The latter allows us to make some hypothetical considerations on the relationship and differences between kin-selection, group-selection and inclusive fitness that Hamilton wanted to present to the attentive, well-prepared audience of the foreign university that had invited him. (shrink)

In his essay From Logos to Mythos, I republished on the twentieth anniversary of its first publication, Most saw in the release of Creuzer’s Symbolik und Mythologie the moment when philology distanced itself from philosophy “refraining strictly from any discussion of what the Greek myths could mean for us, and instead concentrating […] into what the Greek myths could have meant for the Greeks”. This essay analyses the case study offered by the mythological dyad Kronos (Κρόνος) and Chronos (Χρόνος). It (...) highlights some elements that place these two figures at a distance on the philological level but closer on the philosophical one. The essay encourages a dialogue between philological rigour and philosophical use of myth: myth, in its prolificity, is eloquent in every age and a careful understanding of what it meant to the Greeks in its time does not necessarily imply giving up understanding what it may mean to us today. (shrink)